Search

The two books' metaphor (book of scripture and book of nature) provides an invitation for re-examining traditional Christian doctrine and practice when extra-terrestrial life is discovered. Christian churches are encouraged to refine their teachings in three areas: (1) anthropocentric creation; (2) the fall; and (3) imago Dei. The work Teilhard de Chardin lays the groundwork for these conversations. I propose that the discovery of extra-terrestrial life could precipitate a re-imagination of church doctrine in these areas. Furthermore, this conversion of thought will be valuable, in a practical sense, toward a renewed sense of gratitude and stewardship toward life on earth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reflects upon some modern theologians' stance on the idea of "Deep Incarnation" offering its Eastern Orthodox theological, philosophical and scientific assessment. The main problems and corresponding questions to this idea are: (1) Because of the vast and causally disconnected structure of the universe, humanity at best is consubstantial to the 4% of matter in the visible universe so that the claims for the relevance of the historical Incarnation to the whole creation are not plausible; (2) By de facto equating the transfigured flesh of Christ (through the hypostatic union), with the rest of creation, thus depriving the process of deification of humanity and transfiguration of the visible universe of its temporal dimension, Deep Incarnation goes contrary to the Orthodox stance on deification as a personal endeavour not implanted into the logic of the natural world; (3) the claims of the Deep Incarnation idea would be trivial if they were concerned only with the necessary conditions for the historical Incarnation, which are cosmological. However, the sufficient conditions of the Incarnation as an inaugural event of Christian history cannot be placed into the fabric of the material world. (4) The idea of Deep Incarnation may be treated as contributing to the old makroanthropos idea, related to humanity as a mediating agency not only between moral divisions in creation, but also between different life forms by bringing them to the unity in God. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1967 a well-known geology Professor at Tehran University, Dr Yadollah Sahabi, published a book entitled The Creation of Man. The main argument of his book was that the Qur’anic view of the creation of human beings is not incompatible with the modern understanding of the evolution of living organisms. Almost a year later, the most prominent Shi‘a exegete of the Qur’an in the twentieth century wrote a short rebuttal to the book. This was followed by a rejoinder. This paper explores the significance of the above exchanges and their impact on the relationship between science and theology in Iran [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The notion of creation is apparently up for debate again in the science and theology dialogue, after having been one of the major topics of agreement. At least since the Divine Action Project, the common consensus has been that general divine action, that is, divine creation and conservation, is relatively uncontroversial and broadly agreed upon, whereas special divine action, to wit, divine action that goes beyond creation and conservation, including some form of efficient causal particularity, is the subject of the controversy. In this article, I will respond to and reject five claims Joseph Hannon has recently advanced against this consensus and especially William Carroll’s classical interpretation of creation ex nihilo, by which he attempts to show that Carroll grossly misrepresents Aquinas’ account of creation: (1) creative divine action does not involve the giving of existence, but instead produces change; (2) creation is “making,” otherwise God cannot make matter; (3) Carroll’s interpretation of creation amounts to Deism, since creation does not effect change in the material world; (4) this view rests on a confusion of ontological and causal dependence and hence (5) is to be rejected as “metaphysicalist” because on this view divine and creaturely causation operate on two different levels of reality [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While scholars agree that young-earth creationism is problematic, divisions remain over the fundamental question of whether creationism makes testable empirical claims. The key to resolving this impasse lies in Philip Gosse's Omphalos (1857) where he argued that a miraculously created world would exactly resemble one that had formed naturally. Creationists have both adopted and contested the reasoning in Omphalos, but ultimately failed to displace Gosse's more coherent approach. Consequently, as this paper will show, the creationist framework is not only incapable of grounding testable scientific models, but entails the absurd position that much of the universe's apparent history never occurred. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Theological explorations of relativistic physics are typically preoccupied by the consequences of relativistic cosmology, such as the Big Bang theory, the universe's apparent fine-tuning, and eschatology. However, there are also fruitful connections between theology and the physical theory of relativity itself, considered apart from cosmological applications. Indeed, relativistic physics is much more amenable to a created universe than is Newtonian mechanics, or so it is argued. Drawing upon both special and general relativity, three intrinsically relativistic aspects of the Judeo-Christian creation are disclosed: contingency, unity, and beauty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My thinking about religion and science and their relationship has developed through employment and related leadership in both areas of endeavor, along with research and writing. What do we make of the long history that preceded us: the great age of the universe and of our earth, the major extinctions of prior life? Why do human beings today have considerable freedom yet also experience suffering and evil? Current work in interaction and complexification, neuroscience and quantum physics, may provide clues to the modalities of a Creator. How may we begin to comprehend this? Poets and scientists provide hints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been argued that divine creation should be understood solely in a metaphysical and theological sense, and not within the context of modern cosmology and biology. In this way, any conflict between science and religion is totally avoided. William Carroll is a scholar of Aquinas who has justified this position, citing arguments made by Thomas, specifically that creation does not involve change. Here, I argue that this is a major distortion of Aquinas' views and that the ontology of creation formulated is fundamentally incoherent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modern theologians have viewed a Doctrine of Evolution that appeared to teach competition, waste, and striving for dominance as the rule in nature. Theologians responded in several ways: by an "evolutionary account" of creation; by uncovering the parallels between Original Sin and a competitive nature; and by insulating the Doctrine of Creation from scientific theories, while allowing science to move forward unimpeded. Cooperation, mutualism, and the movement between parasitism and mutualism in modern evolutionary biology might prompt reconsideration. A new account of the natural, as well as the evil and suffering within it, might spring from these new starting points. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At a superficial level there is a clash between purposeful creation and purposeless evolution, but at a deeper level it is possible to reconcile them. The Agapic Principle explains that the purpose underlying creation is the relationship that develops between a loving God and a conscious creature of any sort, in any location in the universe. The Agapic Principle allows for evolution to proceed by random changes in the genome, while at the same time providing a way to think about purpose in creation and evolution in a manner consistent with Christian salvation history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to current developments in synthetic biology, the question if humans can "create life" has arisen as an issue of public concern. The traditional idea of humanity "playing god" finds expression in many legends and myths. After a short overview on some of these, I will turn to analyze philosophically and theologically whether we should consider ourselves as "co-creators" given our new technical abilities—and what this would mean in ethical terms. I will then argue for an anthropology of humans as creators of the living and an ethics of creation based on natural theological reasoning and eschatological imagination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this brief response to the papers of Sollereder and Allen in this issue, Southgate considers the state of the debate on evolutionary theodicy, and specifically the source of the disvalues in creation. He responds to Allen's Augustinian suggestions by reference to a recent article on Augustine and theodicy by Stan Rosenberg. He ends by reflecting on the journey in his own thinking in relation to suffering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the work of Christopher Southgate with a view toward interpreting his insights into the integrity of creation, redemption and theodicy in light of Saint Augustine's theology. Drawing on various contributions that Southgate has made, this paper seeks to establish parallels, connections and some agreement between his work and the great African bishop without papering over the obvious disagreements over the Fall, Original Sin, the premises of salvation and biblical hermeneutics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most compelling scientific issues of our generation is the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. The question of whether we are alone in the universe has long fascinated the media and the public and has received fresh momentum in the discovery of exoplanets, a small minority of which have Earth like characteristics. The discovery of life elsewhere in the universe, especially if it is intelligent, asks major but fruitful questions of the Christian tradition in areas such as creation, incarnation, redemption and the nature of what it means to be human. Theological work is needed now rather than being left as a future possibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Bible reveals a free, contingent act of the triune, personal God as the origin of the world. This paper explores the fruitfulness of taking the contingency of creation as the starting-point for our thinking about the natural world. We will see that the contingency of creation implies a conception of the natural order which is in harmony with modern science. It is the foundation for the experimental method and the use of mathematics, provides an understanding of contingent laws of nature, shows that natural order is open to historical evolution, and makes room for chance and novelty. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

It is a common assumption that biological organisms appear as though they were designed. Prior to the Darwinian revolution, the order of biological organisms was often taken as a sign of their divine Creator. It is also commonly argued that Darwinian evolutionary theory as a good explanation for the adaptive complexity of biology reveals this appearance to be merely an illusion. However, in recent philosophical discussion several defenses of the compatibility of divine design and Darwinian evolution have emerged. These defenses insist not only that divine design and evolution are compatible, but even that biological organisms can continue to function as pointers to the Creator, even in a Darwinian cosmos. This article explores and extends these recent arguments. I analyze four different strategies for arguing that the wisdom of the Creator is apparent in biological organisms. The basic underlying assumption is that the products of some larger whole can reflect the rationality and designedness of that whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bridging Wolfhart Pannenberg's comprehensive twentieth-century systematic theology of Creation and Terrence Deacon's very thorough scientific account of material and biological development and evolution results in an integrative view of Creation from Trinitarian relationality to biomolecular processes. Pannenberg's understanding of Logos guides the investigation of the progressive unfolding of forms toward the key construct of information generation which Deacon's theory of emergence explains as selection dynamics. Modeling both space and form as a place where activity generates information synthesizes Pannenberg's complementary activities of Logos and Spirit with Deacon's emergent dynamics and semiosis to develop generative distinctions among a field of systems as a key component of a scientifically plausible theological anthropology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many leading Christian thinkers today accept evolution, but others worry that certain incompatibilities with Biblical doctrines concerning Adam remain. In Should Christians Embrace Evolution, theologian Wayne Grudem succinctly summarizes their main objections when he claims that adopting evolution leads to eight positions contrary to the teaching of the Bible. In response, I show that, regardless of whether evolution occurred or not, there is no incompatibility even when a consistently literal reading of the relevant Biblical texts is maintained. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Modern science reveals that our universe is fine-tuned for life. Many fundamental constants and conditions in our nature fall into very narrow life-allowing ranges. This fine-tuning phenomenon can be addressed by two major hypotheses: the God hypothesis, and the multiverse hypothesis. In this article, I show that recent scientific observations do not favor the multiverse hypothesis. Also, I argue that an omnipotent, omniscient and perfectly good God would not create our fine-tuned universe through the multiverse scenario. Therefore, these two specific hypotheses are incompatible with each other. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Genesis 1:20–25 speaks of God creating water and land creatures. The fossil record suggests that vertebrates on land evolved from vertebrates of the water. In this article about creation through evolution, the author discusses a progression of fossil discoveries pertinent to the evolution of tetrapods, keeping in view the detractions of a Young Earth creationist, and finishing with a biblical-theological perspective on the evolution of tetrapods. The author's work grows out of his interest in exploring how a specific science (paleontology)—as viewed through specific discoveries and a specific evolutionary lineage—might engage actively with biblical creation passages. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Bonaventure describes the natural world as carmen Dei (song of God) that humanity should be able to detect through philosophical loisdom. Many contemporary evolutionary biologists, however, present the natural world as an argument against God's existence. Evolution is deemed incompatible with Providence and natural causes competitively exclusive of divine ones. These arguments against God are not proper to science, but to scientism. This purported conflict between evolution and faith is overcome by respecting the epistemological boundaries among science, philosophy, and theology, understanding creation as ontological dependence, and having a non-contrastive divine transcendence, in which God's transcendence does not oppose God's immanence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neither Aristotle nor Aquinas assumes the reality of the evolution of species. Their systems of thought, however, remain open to the neu> data, offering an essential contribution to the ongoing debate between scientific, philosophical, and theological aspects of the theory of evolution. After discussing some key issues of substance metaphysics in its encounter with the theory of evolution (hylomorphism, transformism of species, teleology, chance, the principle of proportionate causation), I present a Thomistic response to its major hypotheses. Concerning the philosophy of Aquinas, I trace what might be seen as a preliminary description of natural selection in his commentary on Aristotle's Physics. Turning toward theology, besides addressing the topics that were referred to in the past-- such as: Aquinas' reading of Genesis, his account of creation as dependence in being, secondary and instrumental causality, and univocal/equivocal predication of God--I bring into discussion Thomas' concept of the perfection of the universe, which has been virtually unused in this context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we bring to light several ways randomness--i.e., undetermined and unintended events--may contribute to our understanding of God's providence and personality. We begin by making clearer a certain problem that randomness has been thought to pose to theism. We then discuss recent criticisms of certain contemporary solutions to this problem that emphasize the value of an autonomous creation. From there, we propose a fresh way of understanding the value of a semi-autonomous creation that does not succumb to these recent critiques. Our end goal is to explore new reasons God might have to value randomness. In particular, we highlight two plausible, interrelated candidate values: (1) There are certain aesthetic properties that a partially random, self-forming creation enjoys; and (2) Such a creation grants God and creatures certain pleasures, such as wonder, anticipation, curiosity, surprise, and appreciation. In articulating our version of the autonomy defense, we position it within two opposing accounts of divine providence, specifically open theism and simple foreknowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For many contemporary theologians, God could not have created the universe in any other way than leading inevitably to evil. First, this essay will argue that non-human evil represents genuine evil. Second, it will argue that if contingency leads inevitably to evil, then God is too closely implicated in the creation of evil. Finally, I will re-explore the occurrence of a primordial deviation from God's original plan logically prior to creation as the best explanation for the origin of evil, thereby placing the origin of evil back in the context of freedom rather than implicating the nature of contingent reality. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article develops an argument that the Christian concept of creation of the world, being an issue of the modern dialogue between theology and science, must be rethought and reformulated along the lines of recent advancements in cosmology and philosophy. It is argued that the prevailing natural attitude to the issue of the creation of the universe (whether based on Biblical hermeneutics or scientific theories) is philosophically inadequate because it does not account for the facticity of the articulating consciousness, which itself is the modality of the created. Correspondingly, the issue of creation receives a different interpretation: it is the coming into existence of personal life in the Divine image, capable of recognizing its createdness, and articulating creation as hypostatically distant from the comprehending subjectivity. Creation as inseparable from the life of subjectivity thus acquires the status of a saturated phenomenon to which neither successive quantitative, nor qualitative synthesis, nor temporal synthesis can be applied; it also escapes a rubric of relation. The created world, or the universe as a whole, gives itself to us from its own “self” to such an extent that it affects us, changes us and almost constitutes us, and stages us out of its own giving itself to us. The universe is present in the background of our existence through relationship and communion in such a way that we can express this presence ecstatically—through music, painting, poetry etc.—that presence which cannot be formalized in definitions of physics and mathematics. It is the living humanity that is the only and ultimate manifestation of God through its creation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

There seems to be a vast gulf between the grand-scale story of the world of creation, cosmic in scope and pitiless in its operations, and the small-scale story of Jesus as embodying divine empathy. The concept of deep incarnation offers a bridge by arguing that God's own Logos or Wisdom, when assuming the particular life story of Jesus, also conjoins the material conditions of God's world of creation at large (“all flesh”), shares the fate of all biological life forms (“grass and lilies”), and experiences the pains of all sentient creatures (“sparrows and foxes”). Incarnation is thus the story of God's reach into the very tissue of material and biological existence. In the embodied Logos, the “flesh” of Jesus Christ is co-extensive with his divinity. Otherwise, the incarnation would be skin deep, confined to a historical figure of the past, or merely an external appendix to divine life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the need for a theological attentiveness to recent discoveries in the scientific world, and the corresponding debates between theologians and scientists. Specifically the article discusses the writings of Lawrence M. Krauss about a universe from nothing in five scientific claims, and the need for caution by believers in God, not to infer a creation story from the scientific view of the Big Bang theory. The progressive understanding of the spiritual dimension of human nature is just as important as the progressive understanding of the scientific nature of the universe. Krauss seems not to share a faith in theological matters which is not a reason on his part to belittle it. The progressive understanding of the spiritual dimension of human nature is just as important as the progressive understanding of the scientific nature of the universe. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Most recently, Klaas Kraay has argued that God could have created a subset of all logically possible universes, the member universes of which are chosen by God due to their axiological status. In the present paper, we first argue that Kraay fails in developing an axiological basis for his theistic multiverse. In particular, we demonstrate that science provides no evidence for a multiverse constituted only by universes above a certain axiological threshold. In the second part of this paper, we argue that the idea of the theistic multiverse might be made fruitful in the context of Open Theism. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

An essay is presented on the language describing creation in Bible. It describes how the Bible affirms the idea of God's creating through process and examines the distinction between direct special creation and indirect creation through natural law. The author discusses how the context and usage of various Hebrew terms describing God's creative activity affirm an understanding of God's creation of plants, animals and humans through non-instantaneous processes.

The article offers a response to a paper which examined the divine action of God in the world. It discusses the unity between two dimensions of a single divine project in relation to the world, namely creation and redemption. It explores how the fourfold concept of divine action proposed by the paper overcomes the reductionist, non-eschatological views of divine action in both deism and naturalistic theism.

The article offers a response to a paper which discussed the divine action of God in relation to the world and the problem of natural evil. It explains why the correlation between natural goodness and natural evil is not inherently necessary to creation. It comments on the paper's use of the idea of an eschatology of transformation to redress the problem of natural evil. It suggests looking at theodicy as a criterion of theory choice in Christian constructive theology.

I plead here in favor of more frequent recourse to and input from theologians, in debates about the creationist crisis, not only in order to develop new aspects of theology concerning creation, but also to undertake a real theological diagnosis of this crisis. The task of theology is not simply to write catechisms or Summae, but it is much more to do with incompleteness, light and shade. Theologians must confront themselves with reality-like secular theology at the seventeenth century, but also natural theologies-without forgetting to pose limits: absolute power of God, reality of the evil, scientific discoveries that are negative for theology, etc. Theology is a work of revelation (apocalypse). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Light is a topic of central importance for understanding the relationship between God and creation. Understanding the relationship and distinction between uncreated and created light helps us to understand better the relationship between God and creation. The scientific study of light, taking full account of the experience of light, may be a crucial phenomenon in the move towards an emancipated natural science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of evolutionary theodicy remains an area of difficulty within the science-theology dialogue. The evolutionary understanding of life identifies a process where suffering and extinction are intrinsic; however, theology seeks to articulate God's loving goodness towards creation. Therefore the central question of evolutionary theodicy becomes: “How can a loving God act by such a process?” Within the view of theistic evolution, evolutionary theodicy has resulted in a deeper understanding of Christology and Pneumatology, as the whole of creation is understood to be moving towards its eschatological perfection in Christ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ted Peters has emphasized the theological concept of prolepsis and a “retroactive ontology” in which God creates from the future. We consider here possible connections between prolepsis and scientific theories about transmission of signals backwards in time. After considering objections to time travel, we discuss putative means of achieving it—tachyons, “time machine” solutions of Einstein's equations, waves in dark energy, and advanced solutions of wave equations. We then reflect on ways those theoretical constructs, if realized, might be of theological interest. Applications to the resurrection of Jesus, predictive prophecy and the creation of the universe will be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I begin by noting that several theologians and others object to special divine action (divine intervention and action beyond conservation and creation) on the grounds that it is incompatible with science. These theologians are thinking of classical Newtonian science; I argue that in fact classical science is in no way incompatible with special divine action, including miracle. What is incompatible with special divine action is the Laplacean picture, which involves the causal closure of the universe. I then note that contemporary, quantum mechanical science doesn't even initially appear to be incompatible with special divine action. Nevertheless, many who are well aware of the quantum mechanical revolution (including some members of the Special Divine Action Project) still find a problem with special divine action, hoping to find an understanding of it that doesn't involve divine intervention. I argue that their objections to intervention are not sound. Furthermore, it isn't even possible to say what intervention is, given the quantum mechanical framework. I conclude by offering an account of special divine action that isn't open to their objections to intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dietrich Bonhoeffer's work of 1933, Creation and Fall, is analysed for its potential impact on the contemporary dialogue between science and religion. Bonhoeffer's christological interpretation of Genesis 1-3, and his appropriation of these chapters as God's word for us today, are commended to modern evangelicals. His finding Scripture more materialistic than Darwinism impacts both human self-understanding and ethics. Although generally negative in this early work towards natural theology, Bonhoeffer nevertheless offers opportunities for the latter, notably in his comments on the divine dependence of the truths of mathematics and, notwithstanding his own intentions, through his concept of "orders of preservation." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two challenges loom large for efforts to develop a theology of evolution. The first is the problem of purpose: can evolutionary processes, in which chance plays so prominent a role, be understood as the context of God's purposive action? The second is the problem of the pervasiveness of suffering and death in evolution. To the extent that we succeed in responding to the first difficulty by giving an account of how God's purposes are enacted in the history of life, we deepen the conundrum about God's relation to natural evils. In particular, if we embrace evolution as God's clever way of making life make itself, we will find it difficult to sustain the classical theological claim that death is a disruptive interloper in God's good creation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the relationship between Incarnation and extraterrestrial life in view of the question: can extraterrestrials be saved? The Franciscan theology of Bonaventure and Scotus is used to explore "exoChristology" by examining the Incarnation as a theological rather than anthropological event. The primacy of Christ, held by Franciscan theologians, provides an integral relationship between Christ and creation. From this relationship, it is shown that Incarnation takes place wherever there is intelligible life. It is suggested that all possible worlds, created through the Word of God, bear a spiritual potency within them and are open to spiritual transformation. The divine Word is incarnate in every created order through the appropriate form of intelligible life within that order and completes that order through love. Because Incarnation may take on other extraterrestrial life forms, it is suggested that there may be multiple incarnations but only one Christ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paul Davies takes note of the unresolved philosophical issues involved in the use of “field” imagery within evolutionary biology and quantum physics. The author proposes that the metaphysical scheme of Alfred North Whitehead with its notion of “actual occasions” might be key to solving these mysteries, but only if Whiteheadian “societies” were reinterpreted as enduring structured fields of activity for the ongoing succession of their constituent actual occasions. For, implicit in this revised understanding of Whiteheadian societies is a new paradigm for the philosophical relation between the One and the Many, which would allow for genuine top-down as well as bottom-up causation in the emergence of new forms or structures within the evolutionary process.} [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many theological terms such as ‘causation’ and ‘creation’ carried technical meanings during the late thirteenth century but these same terms are often treated commonly in modern discourse. When the tension between creationism and evolution is examined in light of what well known medieval theologians wrote, it appears that the current debates related to evolution often lapse into the fallacy of equivocation. One unfortunate consequence of this breakdown is that the root of the problem, the subtle language involved, often remains unexposed. Moreover, the level of passionate discourse surrounding evolution suggests that a nearly scholastic approach is required if further confusion is to be limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present article analyzes al-Ghazālī's (1058 – 1111) effort to reconcile the theological concept of a causally efficacious Creator with the idea of regularity, and thus, predictability, in physical nature. Al-Ghazālī reframed the necessity (al-darūra) of causal relationships in nature in order to achieve two goals: one, theological and the other, epistemological. His intellectual solution ultimately preserved both the human ability to know material causal relations as well as divine creative omnipotence, in particular, God's ability to perform miracles. The Muslim discussion thus indirectly contributed to Western speculative thinking on this problem. The balanced approach that al-Ghazālī took, nevertheless, fell by the wayside within the Islamic environment where it was either ignored, or only partially understood, or narrowly and imperfectly interpreted. In the purely Muslim context, it also is essential to underscore the importance of al-Ghazālī's epistemological discoveries in laying the groundwork for the establishment of a paradigm of natural scientific speculation in the medieval Islamic world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Intelligent Design Movement has a long tradition and is advocated today not just by conservative Protestant groups. Yet today's specialization requires moving beyond the rectilinear affirmation of intelligent design. We must show that the scientific affirmation of evolution and the theological affirmation of creation belong together. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Augustine of Hippo has expressed a vision of beauty in nature that could, if better known, encourage traditional Christians and secular ecologists to affirm the ground they have in common. For Augustine the ideal would be to see nature as God sees it, feeling deeply both its beauty and its impermanence, loving nature without clinging to it. With such clear seeing would come love and the motivation for sustained and skillful action. This paper discusses Augustine's paradigm and what blocks us from seeing it, and then frames principles for an authentically Augustinian response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Langdon Gilkey died on 19 November 2004. This article reviews his career and examines elements in his systematic theology such as: (1) fallenness in human nature; (2) the transcendence and graciousness of God; (3) the Neo-Orthodox agenda; (4) creation and the dialogue with science; and (5) inter-religious dialogue. Gilkey's theological method of responding to human experience with the Christian message through a process of interpreting symbols is critically evaluated. This article is simultaneously published in Dialog and Theology and Science . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The theory of evolution challenges the traditional temporal pattern of creation, fall, and restoration that lies behind Christian soteriology. This paper explores the possibility of interpreting soteriology without tying it to this temporal pattern. To do so, it examines how salvation is presented in John Wesley's theology to see whether his soteriological concerns can be maintained when the temporal pattern is broken. Certain features of his theology allow a reconception of salvation in light of humans as having evolved to be biocultural. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author comments on the criticisms raised against the appointment of Francis Collins, former head of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) as Director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). Information is presented on Collins' achievements as a research geneticist. An overview of Collins' outlook on creation and evolution is provided. The author criticizes Sam Harris, an atheist advocate and author of "The End of Religion," for his questions about Collins' religious beliefs.

The authors respond to comments on a review of the book "Time in Eternity: Pannenberg, Physics and Eschatology in Creative Mutual Interaction" by Robert John Russell. Topics discussed include the continuity/discontinuity between the present Creation and the New Creation as far as their temporal structures are concerned, the idea of attributing tout court a non-Hausdorff structure to the time in the present Creation.